Reading into Cox rebuke

S.J. CAHN

There’s a growing buzz in political circles that Atty. Gen. John

Ashcroft won’t make it to a second Bush Administration, if there is

one.

Ashcroft is one of the people who fall into my “six degrees of

separation” category. (That’s the idea that everyone in the world is

separated from each other by no more than six people. The keys are

people like Ashcroft who have links to so many people.) The first

publisher I worked for, at a weekly paper in Linn, Mo., called -- I

kid you not -- the Unterrified Democrat, was a friend of Ashcroft’s.

I’ve always had a bad sense about him as a result. Now, it seems,

a lot of people are sharing that sense. Included among them, judging

by a statement late last week, is Rep. Chris Cox.

Ashcroft, of course, last week held a press conference that

initially appeared to suggest the U.S. faced a high risk of attack by

terrorists this summer. The outcry since has upped the anti-Ashcroft

buzz.

In response, Cox issued a statement that read in part: “The

absence of Secretary Ridge [Tom Ridge, the secretary of homeland

security] from yesterday’s news conference held by the attorney

general and the FBI director, and the conflicting public messages

their separate public appearances delivered to the nation, suggests

that the broad and close interagency consultation we expect -- and

which the law requires -- did not take place in this case.”

That’s a pretty solid indictment, especially coming from a

congressman who rarely gets involved in the uglier side of politics.

I’m tempted to say that if even Cox is piling on, Ashcroft truly

must be done. And it isn’t for the usual political reasons. In this

case, it looks as though on a fundamental level of policy and

procedure, Ashcroft has lost a powerful politician. It isn’t about

personalities, political payback or partisanship. It’s just about a

member of the White House being too out-of-step with the rest of the

party.

Of course, I’m of half a mind to think that Cox’s typical ignoring

of politics means we shouldn’t read anything into it.

But as the Ashcroft story continues to unfold, watch to see

whether the emphasis turns out to be on his mishandling of the White

House message. If it does, we’ll be able to look back and see Cox’s

rebuke as a moment when the tide was turning.

We get e-mails

Several weeks ago, I wrote about the Republicans’ smart, and

aggressive, use of the Internet and e-mail.

I also promised to report on any ether-literature I received from

the other side.

Wednesday, I finally got a piece from Democrats for America’s

Future.

(The group goes by the acronym DAF, which I can’t pronounce any

other way than daft. And that seems a bit stupid, no?)

It is far less eye-catching than what the Republicans have been

sending. Mainly it is links to the group’s website, a far less

user-friendly presentation than the GOP’s comprehensive,

Democrat-bashing missives.

The DAF e-mail includes the following:

A “Republican outrage of the week” reads: “Paying for Bush’s tax

cuts -- Veterans, school kids, police officers and firefighters.

Those are just some of the Americans who would pay the price if

President Bush gets a second term -- and the chance to impose

wide-ranging and painful domestic spending cuts in order to subsidize

his tax cuts for the super-rich.”

A “Straight talk for Democrats” that features: “Gore: Rumsfeld,

Rice and Tenet must go -- Calling the situation in Iraq a

‘catastrophe,’ an angry Vice President Al Gore says that it is time

for the responsible parties to get their walking papers.”

And “key issues to watch,” which is not surprising: “Bungling Iraq

-- You don’t have to listen to us when we say that President George

Bush has made a complete mess of the Iraq situation. We’ve compiled a

list of quotes from a wide range of experts on the topic of the Bush

failure in Iraq.”

There also are links to contact or join the group.

Essentially, the e-mail is just an encapsulation of the group’s

website.

So on this front, the Republicans win hands down.

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He may be reached at (949)

574-4233 or by e-mail at s.j.cahn@latimes.com.